Hollingsworth v. State

211 S.W. 454, 85 Tex. Crim. 248, 1919 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 568
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 29, 1919
DocketNo. 5265.
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 211 S.W. 454 (Hollingsworth v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hollingsworth v. State, 211 S.W. 454, 85 Tex. Crim. 248, 1919 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 568 (Tex. 1919).

Opinions

DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of incest, his punishment being assessed at five years confinement in the penitentiary.

Before court adjourned there was an order entered allowing sixty days to the defendant in which to file his bills of exception and statement of facts. Court adjourned the 24th of August, and the statement of facts and bills of exception, except two bills, were filed on November 8th. One bill bears no file mark. The Assistant Attorney General moves to strike from consideration all the bills of exception except that filed within the time, which is bill No. 1. Under the rules and the authorities the motion as to the bills of exception will have to be sustained. The decisions are quite numerous sustaining the above proposition. This, however, does not apply to the statement of facts. There would be ninety days allowed after the adjournment of the term of court in which to file the statement of facts. Redman v. State, 67 Texas Crim. Rep., 374; Romero v. State, 72 Texas Crim. Rep., 105. The bills of exception, in order to be considered, must have been filed within the sixty days allowed.

Bill No. 1 reserved exceptions to the action of the court admitting certain letters, which are not set out in the bill but referred to in the statement of facts. The judge qualifies this bill by stating these letters were held by this court on the last appeal, in an opinion written by Judge Morrow, to be admissible. It would be of no practical utility to discuss that matter.

It is further contended that the evidence is not sufficient for want of corroboration. The girl testifies to a case against appellant. We are of opinion that, taking all the circumstances as shown in this record, there is sufficient evidence tending to connect the defendant with the case testified by the prosecutrix.

As the case is presented by the record we find no reversible error, and the judgment is ordered to be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Wilson v. State
184 S.W.2d 141 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1944)
Ramirez v. State
40 S.W.2d 138 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1931)
Carlile v. State
255 S.W. 990 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Mitchell v. State
222 S.W. 983 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
211 S.W. 454, 85 Tex. Crim. 248, 1919 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hollingsworth-v-state-texcrimapp-1919.